강제집행면탈
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the act of causing damage to property or obstructing the exercise of rights is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, even though it is recognized that the defendant intentionally destroyed or damaged the part of the building of this case.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.
In the trial court, the prosecutor withdrawn the previous criminal facts, applicable provisions of Acts, and charges against the defendant, and applied for the amendment of the indictment with the selected addition as follows, and since this court permitted this and changed the subject of the adjudication, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
(As examined in the future, this Court convicted the Defendant of the damage to property among the charges that have been selectively modified as seen above).
On a selective basis, the Defendant, from March 11, 2009, has operated the “D” in accordance with C’s Nos. 101, C’s Nos. 102 and C’s Nos. 213.
The Defendant: (a) on December 29, 2010, the victim Gui Agricultural Cooperatives, the mortgagee of the maximum debt amount of KRW 5.32 billion against the said friendship or building, applied for a voluntary auction on the said friendship or building; (b) on April 23, 2015, G was decided to permit sale in the said voluntary auction procedure; (c) on the ground that G was unable to obtain a loan of the said friendship or building for the use of the successful bid price as a security, thereby having the said friendship or building reduced the value of the security by destroying the said friendship or the building, which is a part of the said building.
On May 19, 2015, the Defendant instructed three persons, such as H, who are boiler engineers, on the building of the above stoves, and ordered them to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to s to
In this respect.